Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Marc Benigni wrote: > The issues inherent in counting events aren't so gloomy though, since in > most cases you won't know the number of notes you intend to play in >advance > anyway. 9 times out of 10 you'll use a manual mode - you hit the switch, >and > the RiffBox loops beginning on the very next event. This is really just a > refinement of the typical looper, where you press the switch and looping > begins immediately. But its a BIG refinement. The result is glitchcore > without the glitches. A bit of practice and loops start coming out *very* > clean. And in this scenario you can play fast, legato runs without >worry, so > long as the last note is distinct from the first, and you hit that pedal > somewhere in between. i.e. if there's a rest at the end of the >measure(s), > you're golden. I read the manual a while ago, and I still have to wonder why this is such a BIG refinement? Sure, it takes some practice to hit a foot switch at the start/end of the loop. But from what you say, does it take any less practice to alter your playing style and set up side chains so that it can detect the start/end events? Personally, I don't have any problems pressing footswitches at the right times, and I like having the ability to end a loop on a "fade" without having to make an audible event. His mode concepts look interesting, but the whole event thing just seems like marketing hype. I would consider buying one to explore modes, but I would want a way to turn off events and just tap loop times. It also does not appear to support being a sync slave (not very well anyway), only a sync master. Jeff